AMD Radeon RX 590 vs NVIDIA Quadro P2000

Comparative analysis of AMD Radeon RX 590 and NVIDIA Quadro P2000 videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory, Technologies. Benchmark videocards performance analysis: PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, Geekbench - OpenCL, CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.

 

Differences

Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon RX 590

• Videocard is newer: launch date 1 year(s) 9 month(s) later
• Around 37% higher core clock speed: 1469 MHz vs 1076 MHz
• Around 4% higher boost clock speed: 1545 MHz vs 1480 MHz
• 2348.8x more texture fill rate: 222.48 GTexel/s vs 94.72 GTexel / s
• A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 12 nm vs 16 nm
• Around 60% higher maximum memory size: 8 GB vs 5 GB
• Around 14% higher memory clock speed: 8000 MHz vs 7008 MHz
• Around 35% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 9374 vs 6957
• Around 25% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 789 vs 630
• Around 99% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 45591 vs 22896
• Around 21% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 137.469 vs 113.416
• Around 47% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 2083.862 vs 1414.794
• Around 83% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 12.352 vs 6.736
• Around 72% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 139.477 vs 81.206
• Around 82% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 762.142 vs 417.823
• Around 31% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 13383 vs 10251
• Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3716 vs 3681
• Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3359 vs 3316
• Around 31% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 13383 vs 10251
• Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3716 vs 3681
• Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3359 vs 3316

Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro P2000

• 426.9x better floating-point performance: 3,031 gflops vs 7.1 TFLOPs
• 2.3x lower typical power consumption: 75 Watt vs 175 Watt
• 2.7x better performance in 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 2958 vs 1081

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: AMD Radeon RX 590
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro P2000

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	9374 6957
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	789 630
Geekbench - OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2	45591 22896
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	137.469 113.416
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2083.862 1414.794
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	12.352 6.736
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	139.477 81.206
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	762.142 417.823
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	13383 10251
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3716 3681
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3359 3316
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	13383 10251
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3716 3681
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3359 3316
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score	GPU 1 GPU 2	1081 2958

Compare specifications (specs)